Top Law Schools

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 7:57 pm**

I'm taking smug solace in the fact that whoever wrote the waitlist email overlooked a run-on sentence.

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 7:59 pm**

Went UR today. Think that just means I'm in the next group of decisions? Is it going to take another few months?

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:01 pm**

Looking at the Spreadsheet, it's so obvious they did some serious YP.

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:02 pm**

weezer21 wrote:
Blessedassurance wrote:
kennethellenparcell wrote:I've been to a few Chicago admissions events (and went there for undergrad) - I've heard multiple times from the current students, alums and admissions officers that Chicago is very holistic in their review of applicants. It's definitely not just a numbers game.
Bullshit. They lack the balls for that. You need to be top dog to pull off that Yale-Standard shit (see Berkeley).

I was wait listed, so not sure that you can say they aren't holistic, or that they don't read essays and LOR's.

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:02 pm**

Definitely definitely a possibility. And I do love my alma mater (but have been trying not to engage in Chicago trolling on TLS). However, how much is the yield percentage really weighted in the US News rankings formula? I don't know. I just don't think that Chicago's professed holisticness (?) is completely bullshit.

snehpets wrote:
Blessedassurance wrote:
kennethellenparcell wrote:I've been to a few Chicago admissions events (and went there for undergrad) - I've heard multiple times from the current students, alums and admissions officers that Chicago is very holistic in their review of applicants. It's definitely not just a numbers game.
Bullshit. They lack the balls for that. You need to be top dog to pull off that Yale-Standard shit (see Berkeley).
Yeah, I feel like that's bs Chicago trolling (not by you KEP, but to you). With the numbers of people being WLed (not including me) I wouldn't be surprised if they're working on their atrocious yield rate.

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:05 pm**

Don't all law schools say they are holistic? That was my impression last time I went to a law school fair and they all sounded like they were reading from the same script. I'm sure this is true to small extent, as with every school - someone like EMZE has military service, which will be in his favor. But unless we can show that those accepted with great numbers also had better softs than the great numbers who were WLed, it's more likely this is YP or some other strategy they are employing. Just my two cents.

I did hear someone on the forum say that T6 do not YP, however. So I don't know what to think.

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:05 pm**

Waitlisted today.

http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com/juj122

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:08 pm**

kennethellenparcell wrote:Proof?

Anyone not named Y, H or S has to deal with the likelihood of their best applicants choosing Y, H or S. This wouldn't be an issue if USNWR abolished factoring in the stupid yield-protect stuff. Unfortunately, it's a factor. It's the whole point of the Rubenstein (with exceptions) and NW's new ED thing. The waitlist is designed to gauge your interest etc.

This is not to say Chicago is not a good school. It's a fantastic school. They just don't have the luxury of being a black-box and still managing to hold on to its position or overtaking Columbia.

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:08 pm**

Also WL'd.

around 25th GPA; >75th LSAT URM.

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:11 pm**

I fell asleep. and woke up to a WL email. woohoo.

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:12 pm**

Wow, I'm surprised at all the people with high numbers getting WLed. Hell, some of the people have numbers higher than me.

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:14 pm**

how many were pulled from w/l last year. How many can one expect this year.

UGH. WL and Chi was definitely my top pick.

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:16 pm**

Hawkeye Pierce wrote:Wow, I'm surprised at all the people with high numbers getting WLed. Hell, some of the people have numbers higher than me.

Higher than you? That's impossible to imagine

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:17 pm**

madvillain wrote:
JoeMo wrote:
jpal13 wrote:
madvillain wrote:Waitlisted as well. Just gonna post my real stats here, no point in hiding them anymore, 179/3.86. Held by Harvard and Michigan, WL'd by Penn earlier this week. No NYU acceptance either. I am very depressed.

????? That is not right, you will be accepted somewhere though bro. You are a YP and if you write a LOCI I'm sure you will see some love.
I hope your PS and 250 were polished and that you sent an app to Yale. If so, enjoy New Haven.
I appreciate the humor, but I think I might resign myself to UVA, the way things are going. I feel bad even for saying that because UVA has been the only school to even offer me a scholarship so far.

I wasn't trying to be humorous, I think your numbers are awesome and I think they're worthy of Yale. Nevermind, Chicago and Michigan. This cycle has been wonderful for some and shitty for others. Mind telling us what you think might be holding you back?

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:17 pm**

Mr. Somebody wrote:I did hear someone on the forum say that T6 do not YP, however. So I don't know what to think.

Well, it's not a blatant yield-protect per se. If you show genuine interest, conduct interviews if necessary etc., there's a high probability of getting in off the waitlist if you had the right numbers to begin with. This is a pretty smart move actually, second only to Duke's PT strategy this year.

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:17 pm**

soj wrote:repost for new page
dakure wrote:Form: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/vie ... UXZPU0E6MQ
Spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... n_US#gid=0

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:17 pm**

Waitlisted. Applied early october, 165/3.9

Officially a Chicago bootycall. Dear everyone HYS secure, please withdraw so Chicago will call me at 2 a.m and tell me they love me and need me in their life.

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:19 pm**

To those that were accepted, what kind of numbers did you have? I just sent in my apps yesterday (3.85,170) and I want to know what to expect

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:19 pm**

JoeMo wrote: I wasn't trying to be humorous, I think your numbers are awesome and I think they're worthy of Yale. Nevermind, Chicago and Michigan. This cycle has been wonderful for some and shitty for others. Mind telling us what you think might be holding you back?

Pretty sure they're a foreign applicant which can be unpredictable.

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:21 pm**

Mr. Somebody wrote:Don't all law schools say they are holistic? That was my impression last time I went to a law school fair and they all sounded like they were reading from the same script. I'm sure this is true to small extent, as with every school - someone like EMZE has military service, which will be in his favor. But unless we can show that those accepted with great numbers also had better softs than the great numbers who were WLed, it's more likely this is YP or some other strategy they are employing. Just my two cents.

I did hear someone on the forum say that T6 do not YP, however. So I don't know what to think.

I think some of them really are. Michigan being one of them. I have seen some people with not so stellar numbers (me) get into Michigan and I think it's had to do with the rest of the application package. That being said, I don't know what Chicago's deal is. I would've thought a lot of the people WL'ed today would've gotten in. As for me, I thought I was a ding as my numbers aren't in the realm of competitiveness for the school and I wasn't wrong.

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:24 pm**

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:27 pm**

catholicgirl wrote:Waitlisted. Applied early october, 165/3.9

Officially a Chicago bootycall. Dear everyone HYS secure, please withdraw so Chicago will call me at 2 a.m and tell me they love me and need me in their life.

+1

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:29 pm**

I hear everything you're saying. But then why do two people who have the same numbers (as per LSN) get different decisions? Also, it seems to me that the weight given to the acceptance rate in the US News formula is not too significant (isn't it weighted by .025?). So while certain evidence points to Chicago engaging in yield protection, certain evidence also points to them being holistic in their evaluation. Of course, being "holistic" may also mean screening for some sort of demonstrated committment to Chicago in your application. Who the hell knows.

Blessedassurance wrote:
kennethellenparcell wrote:Proof?
Anyone not named Y, H or S has to deal with the likelihood of their best applicants choosing Y, H or S. This wouldn't be an issue if USNWR abolished factoring in the stupid yield-protect stuff. Unfortunately, it's a factor. It's the whole point of the Rubenstein (with exceptions) and NW's new ED thing. The waitlist is designed to gauge your interest etc.

This is not to say Chicago is not a good school. It's a fantastic school. They just don't have the luxury of being a black-box and still managing to hold on to its position or overtaking Columbia.

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:31 pm**

^ I doubt it. I have almost no ECs and didn't demonstrate a commitment to Chicago in my application.

Posted: **Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:33 pm**

You're probably just an uber awesome person.

Hawkeye Pierce wrote:^ I doubt it. I have almost no ECs and didn't demonstrate a commitment to Chicago in my application.

Top Law Schools

Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle) Forum

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)

Re: Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle)